New Independent Study Show Romney plan would cut taxes for the rich..

[Sallow]

while increasing them for everyone else.

mitt romney's plan revamping the tax code would end up cutting taxes for the richest 5 percent of americans and raising taxes on everyone else, according to new independent study from the brookings institute and tax policy center released wednesday morning.

The study finds that romney's plan would end up cutting taxes by about $87,000 on millionaires under a revenue-neutral model. The top 0.1 percent would see their after-tax revenue income rise by 4.4 percent. Meanwhile, the study estimates that the bottom 95 percent would see about 1.2 percent less after-tax income. They'll see taxes rise about $500, according to the study.


Read more: mitt romney's tax plan would cut taxes for rich, raise for middle class: Study - business insider

the romney camp has already called them "liberal outfits".

But when he was citing the exact same folks to attack rick perry..they were "independent".

idiot

Jerk.

do i win now?

 

[Sallow]

Democrat base needs to start paying their fair share

100% correct.

Right after the Republican base starts paying some fair wages.

I'm in favor of government getting out of the business of labor relations..

You?

You must be a communist.

You must be a flaming homo, SniperFag.

 

[Leweman]

Brookings is a liberal organization and are proud of it. What's their study about the Affordable Healthcare Act or Obama's tax plan say?

 

[SniperFire]

Brookings is a liberal outfit.

 

[Conservative]

100% correct.

Right after the Republican base starts paying some fair wages.

I'm in favor of government getting out of the business of labor relations..

You?

You must be a communist.

You must be a flaming homo, SniperFag.

negged for homophobic comment.

 

[DGS49]

Well, to go "ad hominem" for a few moments, the Democrats and the Non-Fox Media have chosen the apparently successful public relations strategy of evaluating every tax plan on the basis of whether under any circumstances it could be said to benefit someone with a high income.

When you buy into this "thinking" it is, more than anything else, an indication of your own failure to grasp reality.

Regardless of anything else - regardless of who is elected president this November - the tax code will be revised in some way and 90% of Americans will be paying more in Federal Income Tax than they are now. IT CANNOT BE OTHERWISE! Half of America PAYS NO FEDERAL INCOME TAX! How can this possibly go on? How can anyone in their right mind deem this ridiculous situation to be "fair."

And yet it is the logical evolution when every single tax initiative for the past 30 years is evaluated (stupidly, I might say) on the basis of whether it gives a break to The Poor. Well for ****'s sake, if you reduce taxes for low income people every five years, and they don't pay much to start with, then eventually none of them are going to be paying anything. Which is absurd.

And on the other end, dare I mention that a "graduated tax code" is the essence of unfairness. The people earning more are already paying more due to their higher incomes, but the effect is geometric when you piggy-back a higher rate.

And now we have half of America believing that Warren Buffet pays less in FIT than his secretary, when the fact is he pays thousands of times more than she does, but because of how he has structured his wealth, he is paying taxes at a lower NET RATE. So he his paying tens of millions in taxes and half of America (mainly the catatonically stupid, i.e., the Democrats) believe he is NOT PAYING ENOUGH!

Any prospective tax plan MUST be evaluated on how it spreads the burden of the cost of running the Government, and secondarily, whether it provides sufficient incentives for wealth creation. When wealthy individuals and businesses spend 90% of their tax planning effort in devising ways of avoiding taxes that they consider to be unreasonable, then EVERYBODY LOSES. They have the ability to shift income, resources, and investments in a way that the common wage earner cannot understand. This is why when the top marginal tax rate went from over 70% to under 40% during the Reagan years, the total paid in INCREASED. Because the top earners no longer thought that the rate was confiscatory.

Only a fool buys into the bullshit principle that if any tax change benefits the top earners then it is "evil." It is yet another indication of how totally compromised the Non-Fox Media has become. They parrot the Democrat party line even when they themselves may not be conscious of it.

 

[SniperFire]

Well, to go "ad hominem" for a few moments, the Democrats and the Non-Fox Media have chosen the apparently successful public relations strategy of evaluating every tax plan on the basis of whether under any circumstances it could be said to benefit someone with a high income.

When you buy into this "thinking" it is, more than anything else, an indication of your own failure to grasp reality.

Regardless of anything else - regardless of who is elected president this November - the tax code will be revised in some way and 90% of Americans will be paying more in Federal Income Tax than they are now. IT CANNOT BE OTHERWISE! Half of America PAYS NO FEDERAL INCOME TAX! How can this possibly go on? How can anyone in their right mind deem this ridiculous situation to be "fair."

And yet it is the logical evolution when every single tax initiative for the past 30 years is evaluated (stupidly, I might say) on the basis of whether it gives a break to The Poor. Well for ****'s sake, if you reduce taxes for low income people every five years, and they don't pay much to start with, then eventually none of them are going to be paying anything. Which is absurd.

And on the other end, dare I mention that a "graduated tax code" is the essence of unfairness. The people earning more are already paying more due to their higher incomes, but the effect is geometric when you piggy-back a higher rate.

And now we have half of America believing that Warren Buffet pays less in FIT than his secretary, when the fact is he pays thousands of times more than she does, but because of how he has structured his wealth, he is paying taxes at a lower NET RATE. So he his paying tens of millions in taxes and half of America (mainly the catatonically stupid, i.e., the Democrats) believe he is NOT PAYING ENOUGH!

Any prospective tax plan MUST be evaluated on how it spreads the burden of the cost of running the Government, and secondarily, whether it provides sufficient incentives for wealth creation. When wealthy individuals and businesses spend 90% of their tax planning effort in devising ways of avoiding taxes that they consider to be unreasonable, then EVERYBODY LOSES. They have the ability to shift income, resources, and investments in a way that the common wage earner cannot understand. This is why when the top marginal tax rate went from over 70% to under 40% during the Reagan years, the total paid in INCREASED. Because the top earners no longer thought that the rate was confiscatory.

Only a fool buys into the bullshit principle that if any tax change benefits the top earners then it is "evil." It is yet another indication of how totally compromised the Non-Fox Media has become. They parrot the Democrat party line even when they themselves may not be conscious of it.

Today's Democrat party is simply an incipient form of communism.

 

[zeke]

You know what? If I was a part of the ultra rich and I wanted my income tax rate to be reduced every chance I could get, I would have to think of a reason to cut my taxes.

And what could/would be the best "reason" that I could give to a nation that needs jobs.

Oh I know. I would tell them that if my taxes are cut, I will create jobs.

Of course it is all bull shit. But it sure sells well.

If tax cuts on the ultra wealthy created jobs, well the UE numbers would be lower and Mittens wouldn't stand a chance of winning.

But it is a good, plausible lie. The best kind.

I still can't figure out why some of you rethugs want to be waterboys for the ultra rich. They are big boys and girls. They can fight their own tax battles. And they ain't looking out for you.

But you all really "feel their pain".

 

[SniperFire]

You know what? If I was a part of the ultra rich and I wanted my income tax rate to be reduced every chance I could get, I would have to think of a reason to cut my taxes.

And what could/would be the best "reason" that I could give to a nation that needs jobs.

Oh I know. I would tell them that if my taxes are cut, I will create jobs.

Of course it is all bull shit. But it sure sells well.

If tax cuts on the ultra wealthy created jobs, well the UE numbers would be lower and Mittens wouldn't stand a chance of winning.

But it is a good, plausible lie. The best kind.

I still can't figure out why some of you rethugs want to be waterboys for the ultra rich. They are big boys and girls. They can fight their own tax battles. And they ain't looking out for you.

But you all really "feel their pain".

Failed logic and historical reference.

Tax cuts on the rich brought economic boom each and every time it has been tried.

But it probably makes you feel better to hate on those evul rich people who were dealt a better lot in life, eh?


LOL

 

[Seawytch]

Brookings is a liberal organization and are proud of it. What's their study about the Affordable Healthcare Act or Obama's tax plan say?

Right...a "liberal" organization. But wait...your "severely conservative" candidate says they were an "object third party organization"...how weird?

 

[Vel]

If this is Romney's plan, could someone point out why taxes would increase on anyone? I'm not seeing where any rates are raised.
*****************

Romney's individual tax plan consists of five key bullet points, according to his campaign website:
Make permanent, across-the-board 20 percent cut in marginal rates
Maintain current tax rates on interest, dividends, and capital gains
Eliminate taxes for taxpayers with AGI below $200,000 on interest, dividends, and capital gains
Eliminate the Death Tax
Repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT)


Read more: Mitt Romney's Tax Plan Would Cut Taxes For Rich, Raise For Middle Class: Study - Business Insider

 

[NYcarbineer]

While increasing them for everyone else.

Mitt Romney's plan revamping the tax code would end up cutting taxes for the richest 5 percent of Americans and raising taxes on everyone else, according to new independent study from the Brookings Institute and Tax Policy Center released Wednesday morning.

The study finds that Romney's plan would end up cutting taxes by about $87,000 on millionaires under a revenue-neutral model. The top 0.1 percent would see their after-tax revenue income rise by 4.4 percent. Meanwhile, the study estimates that the bottom 95 percent would see about 1.2 percent less after-tax income. They'll see taxes rise about $500, according to the study.


Read more: Mitt Romney's Tax Plan Would Cut Taxes For Rich, Raise For Middle Class: Study - Business Insider

The Romney camp has already called them "liberal outfits".

But when he was citing the exact same folks to attack Rick Perry..they were "independent".

So Sallow let's hear your tax plan? go ahead and give me the brackets and percentages.

Notice that no one around here on the right either knows or cares what Mitt Romney is about.

 

[Conservative]

If this is Romney's plan, could someone point out why taxes would increase on anyone? I'm not seeing where any rates are raised.
*****************

Romney's individual tax plan consists of five key bullet points, according to his campaign website:
Make permanent, across-the-board 20 percent cut in marginal rates
Maintain current tax rates on interest, dividends, and capital gains
Eliminate taxes for taxpayers with AGI below $200,000 on interest, dividends, and capital gains
Eliminate the Death Tax
Repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT)


Read more: Mitt Romney's Tax Plan Would Cut Taxes For Rich, Raise For Middle Class: Study - Business Insider

I asked that in this thread... no answers yet.

Still waiting

 

[Vel]

If this is Romney's plan, could someone point out why taxes would increase on anyone? I'm not seeing where any rates are raised.
*****************

Romney's individual tax plan consists of five key bullet points, according to his campaign website:
Make permanent, across-the-board 20 percent cut in marginal rates
Maintain current tax rates on interest, dividends, and capital gains
Eliminate taxes for taxpayers with AGI below $200,000 on interest, dividends, and capital gains
Eliminate the Death Tax
Repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT)


Read more: Mitt Romney's Tax Plan Would Cut Taxes For Rich, Raise For Middle Class: Study - Business Insider

I asked that in this thread... no answers yet.

Still waiting

Guarantee that it will turn out to be "based on percentages". It's more baffle them with bullshit rhetoric.

 

[Sallow]

Well, to go "ad hominem" for a few moments, the Democrats and the Non-Fox Media have chosen the apparently successful public relations strategy of evaluating every tax plan on the basis of whether under any circumstances it could be said to benefit someone with a high income.

When you buy into this "thinking" it is, more than anything else, an indication of your own failure to grasp reality.

Regardless of anything else - regardless of who is elected president this November - the tax code will be revised in some way and 90% of Americans will be paying more in Federal Income Tax than they are now. IT CANNOT BE OTHERWISE! Half of America PAYS NO FEDERAL INCOME TAX! How can this possibly go on? How can anyone in their right mind deem this ridiculous situation to be "fair."

And yet it is the logical evolution when every single tax initiative for the past 30 years is evaluated (stupidly, I might say) on the basis of whether it gives a break to The Poor. Well for ****'s sake, if you reduce taxes for low income people every five years, and they don't pay much to start with, then eventually none of them are going to be paying anything. Which is absurd.

And on the other end, dare I mention that a "graduated tax code" is the essence of unfairness. The people earning more are already paying more due to their higher incomes, but the effect is geometric when you piggy-back a higher rate.

And now we have half of America believing that Warren Buffet pays less in FIT than his secretary, when the fact is he pays thousands of times more than she does, but because of how he has structured his wealth, he is paying taxes at a lower NET RATE. So he his paying tens of millions in taxes and half of America (mainly the catatonically stupid, i.e., the Democrats) believe he is NOT PAYING ENOUGH!

Any prospective tax plan MUST be evaluated on how it spreads the burden of the cost of running the Government, and secondarily, whether it provides sufficient incentives for wealth creation. When wealthy individuals and businesses spend 90% of their tax planning effort in devising ways of avoiding taxes that they consider to be unreasonable, then EVERYBODY LOSES. They have the ability to shift income, resources, and investments in a way that the common wage earner cannot understand. This is why when the top marginal tax rate went from over 70% to under 40% during the Reagan years, the total paid in INCREASED. Because the top earners no longer thought that the rate was confiscatory.

Only a fool buys into the bullshit principle that if any tax change benefits the top earners then it is "evil." It is yet another indication of how totally compromised the Non-Fox Media has become. They parrot the Democrat party line even when they themselves may not be conscious of it.

I had a thread up not to long ago that suggested that government make it's own stuff and stop giving business to private firms. I've also suggested that government charge use fees for public services on a real use basis..and license what comes out of research labs. You know..running government like a business?

That was met with all sorts of resistance from the likely suspects, conservatives.

Basically..not for the reasons that one would expect.

In any case..such a system would impact private business, immensly. Such things sort of exist around the world. In India..many firms have to provide transportation to it's employees because the roads are so bad that private cars cannot navigate them. That's been changing, mainly because of public demand. But these are the sorts of things that have a grave and expensive impact to business.

Bigger business relies more on government services then the regular citizen. It also degrades them at a faster rate. But wants the public to pay for them. It's yet another example of privatizing profit and socializing liability.

 

[Conservative]

While increasing them for everyone else.




The Romney camp has already called them "liberal outfits".

But when he was citing the exact same folks to attack Rick Perry..they were "independent".

So Sallow let's hear your tax plan? go ahead and give me the brackets and percentages.

Notice that no one around here on the right either knows or cares what Mitt Romney is about.

Notice that no one around here on the left either knows or cares how the 5 bullet points allegedly evaluated, all of which reduce taxes in one way or another, somehow magically only reduce taxes for the rich and somehow maigically increase taxes for the not rich?

Notice how no one around here on the left is showing the math behind this magical happening???

 

[DontBeStupid]

If this is Romney's plan, could someone point out why taxes would increase on anyone? I'm not seeing where any rates are raised.
*****************

Romney's individual tax plan consists of five key bullet points, according to his campaign website:
Make permanent, across-the-board 20 percent cut in marginal rates
Maintain current tax rates on interest, dividends, and capital gains
Eliminate taxes for taxpayers with AGI below $200,000 on interest, dividends, and capital gains
Eliminate the Death Tax
Repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT)


Read more: Mitt Romney's Tax Plan Would Cut Taxes For Rich, Raise For Middle Class: Study - Business Insider

I asked that in this thread... no answers yet.

Still waiting

As I understand the plan, and Romney has described it as such, it's "revenue neutral". Therefore, after placing all those cuts you listed, additional money will have to come from the other income levels in order for the plan to be neutral. If not, then the plan purposely lowers tax receipts.

So, cuts for the top. Increases for the bottom. Simple math.

 

[Katzndogz]

Until the government stops confiscating the money of the successful, there will be no progress out of the obamadepression.

 

[SniperFire]

If this is Romney's plan, could someone point out why taxes would increase on anyone? I'm not seeing where any rates are raised.
*****************

Romney's individual tax plan consists of five key bullet points, according to his campaign website:
Make permanent, across-the-board 20 percent cut in marginal rates
Maintain current tax rates on interest, dividends, and capital gains
Eliminate taxes for taxpayers with AGI below $200,000 on interest, dividends, and capital gains
Eliminate the Death Tax
Repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT)


Read more: Mitt Romney's Tax Plan Would Cut Taxes For Rich, Raise For Middle Class: Study - Business Insider

I asked that in this thread... no answers yet.

Still waiting

As I understand the plan, and Romney has described it as such, it's "revenue neutral". Therefore, after placing all those cuts you listed, additional money will have to come from the other income levels in order for the plan to be neutral. If not, then the plan purposely lowers tax receipts.

So, cuts for the top. Increases for the bottom. Simple math.

Tax receipts are a zero sum game, then?

 

[DontBeStupid]

I asked that in this thread... no answers yet.

Still waiting

As I understand the plan, and Romney has described it as such, it's "revenue neutral". Therefore, after placing all those cuts you listed, additional money will have to come from the other income levels in order for the plan to be neutral. If not, then the plan purposely lowers tax receipts.

So, cuts for the top. Increases for the bottom. Simple math.

Tax receipts are a zero sum game, then?

Obviously no. But Romney and his camp are all calling his plan revenue neutral. They are saying the total tax receipts won't change. So if receipts are designed to go down, either he doesn't understand his plan or he's lying. I think he understands it fine and knows it will raise taxes on 95% of the population.